News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions. Parent comment

Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by doodpants on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @09:11AM (#10040709)
How is having a built-in PDF viewer more secure than downloading the PDF and viewing it in Adobe Reader or Foxit? Is it just that those readers have vulnerabilities that Firefox doesn't?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by rockdoe on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @09:47AM (#10040989)
Yes. The Firefox viewer sits on top of the JavaScript sandbox, which is the same sandbox that has to withstand attacks from pretty much everything on the internet and has been very hardened over the years (same for other browsers).

Ironically it had a vulnerability last week, but that's ONE and that's why it got so much attention. Adobe Reader and similar have had hundreds.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by detaro on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @10:52AM (#10041470)
Allowing people to implement viewers for file types that run in the sandbox as plugins seems like a good idea then. Not that I mind that a PDF-viewer is already built in, but firefox can't support all file types.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Firefox 42 will not allow unsigned extensions by pcwalton on Tuesday August 11, 2015 @12:04PM (#10042080)
A plugin API separate from the Web APIs is itself a large source of complexity and bloat.
[ Parent | on HN ]